Browse by scope issue
Under-scoped repair schedules
Where a repair schedule omits work that the damage plainly requires.
Read more →Water ingress and moisture damage
Scoping repairs where the water path, not just the wet surface, is the issue.
Read more →Storm damage
Separating storm damage from pre-existing condition, and scoping what follows.
Read more →Matching, integration and partial repair
Where a partial repair cannot be integrated into the existing building.
Read more →Repair versus replacement
When patching an element is not a technically viable repair.
Read more →Competing scopes and pricing gaps
Understanding what actually drives a large difference between two quotes.
Read more →Why organise it this way
Repair disputes repeat. The same half-dozen scope problems account for most of them, and the useful thing about a published determination is rarely the outcome. It is the record of what the scope said, what the building actually needed, and where the gap between those two was.
These pages are grouped by the underlying construction issue rather than by date, so that a specific problem can be looked up directly. Each one sets out what the issue is, how it shows up in a repair document, and what we look for when reviewing one.
What this is not
This is scope and technical commentary. It is not advice on your policy, your entitlements, or how to conduct a claim, and we do not act for owners in dealings with insurers. Where a matter needs that kind of help, a lawyer or a licensed claims professional is the right person to speak to.
Important Limitation
This material is general commentary on construction scope and repair methodology. It is not legal advice, financial product advice, insurance claims handling, claims management, or representation of any party in an insurance matter. West Coast Construction Advisory does not hold an Australian Financial Services Licence and does not provide any service requiring one. Every property and every policy differs. Determinations referred to are summarised in our own words from the published record and turn on their own facts. Nothing here should be relied on as an indication of how any other matter would be decided.